Jump to content

User talk:Obedium: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Obedium (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Obedium (talk | contribs)
Remove block request.
Line 22: Line 22:
==Update==
==Update==
Unfortunately, Raul654 had a "Request for Comment" filed against him for that one. It is important to step back and recall that Wikipedia oath we all subscribe to: "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly...do not submit it." We can only hope this serves as reminder to all administrators. [[User:Obedium|Obedium]] ([[User talk:Obedium|talk]]) 19:42, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Unfortunately, Raul654 had a "Request for Comment" filed against him for that one. It is important to step back and recall that Wikipedia oath we all subscribe to: "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly...do not submit it." We can only hope this serves as reminder to all administrators. [[User:Obedium|Obedium]] ([[User talk:Obedium|talk]]) 19:42, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

{{unblock|This computer has many users. Scibaby was blocked when on this computer, and has a different account now. This block is unjustified.}}

Revision as of 06:41, 28 November 2007

Welcome to Obedium. Please note, to avoid continuing concerns over “sockpuppets,” we are working to consolidate all inputs into a single domain.

At Obedium, we are here to defend the bedrock principles on which Wikipedia was founded. For, example, some editors believe only “experts” can contribute to Wikipedia. Although at Obedium we are educated in the physical sciences to beyond the post-doctoral level, we don’t believe you need a Ph.D. degree to contribute. We say let the “experts” take a job at Encyclopedia Britannica. We seek to hold true to those precious words: “The encyclopedia that ANYONE can edit.”

Here at Obedium, we have been the victims of abuse by out of control administrators. That is why we are always here, 24/7, working to ensure that Wikipedia remains open and fair. We understand Wikipedia articles are not meant to be static museum pieces guarded by a few empire-building administrators. We know the purpose of that [Edit] link on each and every article, and are striving to keep the true spirit of Wikipedia alive!

We have noted a recent decrease in civility and increase in ad hominen attacks between editors. We do not engage in these negative attacks. It is instead our policy to stay above the fray, and focus on those positive contributions we can make each and every day.

As part of our ongoing “Commitment to Quality,” Obedium will continue to use only the highest quality references in our contributions. You can rest assured we will never reference our own blogs or web pages.

Please stay tuned for future updates, and thank you for visiting Obedium.

Hey Doc! What the !@#$%&% are you doing!? You stirred up some kind of hornets nest...I have my own hookup now-visit Slamxx. Stay out of trouble. Check out the Nanotech. page when you can. Take care--Slamxx/Scibaby. Slamxx (talk) 06:34, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello SB. I went to your page and there is nothing there. I'm not sure why everyone has their panties in such a bunch, but sometimes we have to make these sacrifices for the sake of science. E-mail me your new address so we can converse like normal human beings. Obedium (talk) 04:39, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Assuming this is not the royal "We", please see WP:USERNAME#Sharing_accounts. Thanks. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 07:25, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

Your latest edit to global warming, changing a sentence in the article to a flat-out lie under a misleading edit summary "improving phrasing" can only be considered vandalism. I have blocked you. Furthermore, since I see you have a propensity to remove the numerous warnings you have recieved here, let me warn you ahead of time - any attempt to remove this message will result in further blocks. Raul654 07:11, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Update

Unfortunately, Raul654 had a "Request for Comment" filed against him for that one. It is important to step back and recall that Wikipedia oath we all subscribe to: "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly...do not submit it." We can only hope this serves as reminder to all administrators. Obedium (talk) 19:42, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

Obedium (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

This computer has many users. Scibaby was blocked when on this computer, and has a different account now. This block is unjustified.

Notes:

  • In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
  • Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.
Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=This computer has many users. Scibaby was blocked when on this computer, and has a different account now. This block is unjustified. |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=This computer has many users. Scibaby was blocked when on this computer, and has a different account now. This block is unjustified. |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=This computer has many users. Scibaby was blocked when on this computer, and has a different account now. This block is unjustified. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}